I dont know when it reached your shores...but it was at a Height in England ONE CENTURY before your Independance. and began to be expressed in England around a century before that we are talking the 1540s here.

Let me explain. In England, King Henry Broke from the Church in Rome. Mary reversed the ballence to Catholicism, and then Elizabeth once and for all destroyed Rome in England. As soon as she had done that, the Reformation as far as Anglicanism is concerned was over. BUT Queen Elizabeth demanded that Faith be a personal thing...this gave rise in the late 1500s to thoughts that really one could worship GOD however they so chose.

By 1630 you had Presbyterians, as an established group to rival Anglicanism, and both groups wanted to be the State Religion. Presbyterians appeared to include the batch of people who believed that freedom of expression was important. The first part of the Civil War in England was Presbyterians Vs Church of England...all the Church of England peeps were Royalists, all the Presbyterians are Parliamentarians.

Once the King had been made to see the error of his ways by the Presbyterians, that little group of people who believed in Freedom to practise non denominational Christianity suddenly went mad. They wouldnt settle for peace. The second part of the Civil War was Presbyterian Vs Presbyterian. One would abide by a constitutional Monarchy so long as they could be State Religion.,..the other side not only wanted freedom of Christianity, they wanted not only a disestablished church..they wanted the end of the Monarchy altogether, and the instigation of a Republic.

They won, but the Republic was...not puritanical enough for the Military Elite. So the Republic collapsed, and the Puritans reigned supreme. Monarchy Hating, Land Conqurering, Imposition of Puritanical principles by way of a nasty type of Martial Law...its maybe the only time in the countries history that alcohol and gambling were technically illegal...as well as swearing...they banned swearing....thats how puritanical they will. Then in 1660 the Military Dictator died...and the lower ranks of the army terned on its new leadership...

...and they were in such a pickle...they went back to the King, Back to the Church of England...and whilst presbyterianism persisted...Puritans...well...me thinks that was quite the end of that

Yeah I know the history pretty well. Did you forget I got a Masters degree in it. But like you said they are all fruit from the same tree. And in the forest there are a lot of trees and thus we have a lot of confusion. This is why I prefer to know nothing but Jesus Chrsit and Him crucified.

There was a small denomination that used the term Puritan in the 1600's...

On a cold January day in 1649, King Charles I stepped before a hushed crowd of Londoners. He ascended the scaffold, wished his executioner well, and knelt, thrusting his head forward onto the dry chopping block. The ax fell, severing his head from his neck. Then the executioner lifted the king’s head and cried, "Behold the head of a traitor."1

The unthinkable had happened. A "Christian" nation had put its king to death. Spontaneously, an audible groan pulsed through the anxious throng, "a groan, said an eyewitness, ’as I never heard before and desire I may never hear again’ "2 — one that represented the sentiment of many Englishmen and most contemporary Europeans.

Few recognize history’s great turning points when they occur. The execution of Charles I was no exception. The ideals of the Reformation had reached full expression, affecting even the sphere of politics, and the Puritans were the vehicle in which these ideals had traveled. They terminated in Charles’ execution.

And, no one was more single mindedly devoted to the Bible, and the political implications of its truths than the Puritan, Oliver Cromwell (1599–1659), the man primarily responsible for the king’s beheading. He was England’s greatest 17th-century statesman and a military genius who, although lacking formal military training, was never defeated in battle. To his dismay, he eventually replaced the king, ruling England as Lord Protector. He was offered crown and monarchy but refused it.

To the ideas planted by Cromwell and his Puritan peers, we owe most of our religious and political liberty, the inception of capitalism, the birth of the scientific revolution, and the advent of denominationalism. Cromwell represented the Puritan ideals well.

For eleven years from the execution of Charles I in 1649 to the restoration of his son Charles II in 1660, England and Scotland were republics. Under the Commonwealth and the Protectorate, Great Britain was governed by Oliver Cromwell. The Puritans pioneered many principles of government that were later copied in Massachusetts and the New England colonies. Many ideas, that we now call democratic, derive from these rigidly moralistic fundamentalists. A majority of the English people, however, were not Puritans. They did not like the Puritan laws against the theater, dancing, drinking, and gambling. After Oliver Cromwell died, there was a general groundswell for a restoration of the legitimate king, Charles II.

Small by WHOSE Standards The only people who think that Purtians were a "movement" and not a religion, were the Puritans themselves who supposedly wanted freedom of expression in religion...but ended up as self imposing as any other viable form of expression.

In England this was a HUGE deal. The Puritans destroyed Everything England actually was...the Monarchy has never recovered despite restoration. The English Civil War was the political reformation of the Modern Democratic Society. That is NOT a small feat. This was not a small Denomination...It was the Entire New Model Army...it was a Military Dictatorship!!!

On a cold January day in 1649, King Charles I stepped before a hushed crowd of Londoners. He ascended the scaffold, wished his executioner well, and knelt, thrusting his head forward onto the dry chopping block. The ax fell, severing his head from his neck. Then the executioner lifted the king’s head and cried, "Behold the head of a traitor."1

The unthinkable had happened. A "Christian" nation had put its king to death. Spontaneously, an audible groan pulsed through the anxious throng, "a groan, said an eyewitness, ’as I never heard before and desire I may never hear again’ "2 — one that represented the sentiment of many Englishmen and most contemporary Europeans.

Few recognize history’s great turning points when they occur. The execution of Charles I was no exception. The ideals of the Reformation had reached full expression, affecting even the sphere of politics, and the Puritans were the vehicle in which these ideals had traveled. They terminated in Charles’ execution.

And, no one was more single mindedly devoted to the Bible, and the political implications of its truths than the Puritan, Oliver Cromwell (1599–1659), the man primarily responsible for the king’s beheading. He was England’s greatest 17th-century statesman and a military genius who, although lacking formal military training, was never defeated in battle. To his dismay, he eventually replaced the king, ruling England as Lord Protector. He was offered crown and monarchy but refused it.

To the ideas planted by Cromwell and his Puritan peers, we owe most of our religious and political liberty, the inception of capitalism, the birth of the scientific revolution, and the advent of denominationalism. Cromwell represented the Puritan ideals well.

For eleven years from the execution of Charles I in 1649 to the restoration of his son Charles II in 1660, England and Scotland were republics. Under the Commonwealth and the Protectorate, Great Britain was governed by Oliver Cromwell. The Puritans pioneered many principles of government that were later copied in Massachusetts and the New England colonies. Many ideas, that we now call democratic, derive from these rigidly moralistic fundamentalists. A majority of the English people, however, were not Puritans. They did not like the Puritan laws against the theater, dancing, drinking, and gambling. After Oliver Cromwell died, there was a general groundswell for a restoration of the legitimate king, Charles II.

Small by WHOSE Standards The only people who think that Purtians were a "movement" and not a religion, were the Puritans themselves who supposedly wanted freedom of expression in religion...but ended up as self imposing as any other viable form of expression.

In England this was a HUGE deal. The Puritans destroyed Everything England actually was...the Monarchy has never recovered despite restoration. The English Civil War was the political reformation of the Modern Democratic Society. That is NOT a small feat. This was not a small Denomination...It was the Entire New Model Army...it was a Military Dictatorship!!!

That was the movement Dave. In that group were Congregationalist, Presbyterians, Anglicans, and a group that would later in America become the Baptist. The denomination was a spin of of the Congregationalist and at its peak had less that 3000 adherents. But since it was an English thing maybe you can cite a source I am unaware of. I only know what history books say.

I don't pretend to understand it completely and the whole "Predestination vs. Free Will" thing is still one of the great mysteries of the Christian faith. The only reason that I believe in Election is because it is so clearly taught in Scripture.

Jesus couldn't have stated Divine Election any clearer than He did in John 15:16 (emphasis added)
"You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you."

Another really good quote from Christ is in John 17:9
“I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours."

Now, I'm no Bible scholar, but why would Jesus NOT be praying for the world, unless GOD never intended to save the whole world?

Also, if salvation was completely a human work and we chose GOD, then wouldn't Jesus be saying something more along the lines of "I do not pray for the world but for those who have chosen You," instead of "those whom You have given Me"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Max

This is a serious question, I'm not trying to be an ass (amazing right, I'm not trying to be an ass for once). If God predestines me to go to Heaven and you not to, what happens to you when you die?

Yes, if you were elect and you accept Christ, then you would go to Heaven. If I was not elect, then I would hear the call, but it wouldn't affect me. The Gospel would be like the seed that fell by the wayside for me, in the parable of the sower (Luke 8:4-15). In other words, Satan would snatch it away before it even took root. So I would not go to Heaven, but I would not care, because I would have no time or interest in GOD or the things of GOD.

However, I believe that just because you are elect does not guarantee that you will go to Heaven. You still need to accept Christ as your Lord and Savior. So there is still the possibility of rejection and thus free will is not completely removed from the equation.

Again, I don't completely understand it, but I believe it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VCURamFan

It's not God flipping a coin for Heaven or Hell. All of us are going to Hell. We have all sinned & fallen short of the glory & perfection of God. Some God has predestined to save. Those who do not hear the irresistible call of his Grace will continue on the path to Hell.

Exactly, GOD doesn't send anyone to Hell, everyone was destined for Hell from the moment they were born.

I believe that GOD takes an active approach in saving people, but He doesn't choose to save everyone and that is His prerogative:

Romans 9:15-18
For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.” Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.

In fact, I think Pharoah is a perfect picture of this:

Exodus 7:2-5
"You shall speak all that I command you. And Aaron your brother shall tell Pharaoh to send the children of Israel out of his land. And I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and multiply My signs and My wonders in the land of Egypt. But Pharaoh will not heed you, so that I may lay My hand on Egypt and bring My armies and My people, the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great judgments. And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I stretch out My hand on Egypt and bring out the children of Israel from among them.”

Exodus 7:13
And Pharoah's heart grew hard, and he did not heed them, as the Lord had said.

First Plague: Waters become Blood
Exodus 7:23
And Pharaoh turned and went into his house. Neither was his heart moved by this.

Second Plague: Frogs
Exodus 8:15
But when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and did not heed them, as the LORD had said.

Third Plague: Lice
Exodus 8:19
Then the magicians said to Pharaoh, “This is the finger of God.” But Pharaoh’s heart grew hard, and he did not heed them, just as the LORD had said.

Fourth Plague: Flies
Exodus 8:32
But Pharaoh hardened his heart at this time also; neither would he let the people go.

Fifth Plague: Livestock Disease
Exodus 9:7
Then Pharaoh sent, and indeed, not even one of the livestock of the Israelites was dead. But the heart of Pharaoh became hard, and he did not let the people go.

Sixth Plague: Boils
Exodus 9:12
But the LORD hardened the heart of Pharaoh; and he did not heed them, just as the LORD had spoken to Moses.

(Notice something different with that last one?)

Seventh Plague: Hail
Exodus 9:34-35
And when Pharaoh saw that the rain, the hail, and the thunder had ceased, he sinned yet more; and he hardened his heart, he and his servants. So the heart of Pharaoh was hard; neither would he let the children of Israel go, as the LORD had spoken by Moses.

Eighth Plague: Locusts
Exodus 10:1
Now the LORD said to Moses, “Go in to Pharaoh; for I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his servants, that I may show these signs of Mine before him,"

Exodus 10:16-20
Then Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron in haste, and said, “I have sinned against the LORD your God and against you. Now therefore, please forgive my sin only this once, and entreat the LORD your God, that He may take away from me this death only.” So he went out from Pharaoh and entreated the LORD. And the LORD turned a very strong west wind, which took the locusts away and blew them into the Red Sea. There remained not one locust in all the territory of Egypt. But the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he did not let the children of Israel go.

(Interesting, Pharaoh seemed repentant at least on the outside, but GOD hardened his heart so that he would not let the Israelites go, paving the way for 2 more plagues.)

Ninth Plague: Darkness
Exodus 10:27
But the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he would not let them go.

Death of the Firstborn Announced:
Exodus 11:10
So Moses and Aaron did all these wonders before Pharaoh; and the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he did not let the children of Israel go out of his land.

Finally, GOD sends the 10th plague and He kills all the firstborn of Egypt (children of royalty, children of slaves, and the offspring of the livestock), except for those Israelites who marked their doors with lamb's blood and were passed over.

So, did GOD violate Pharaoh's free will? What about all the firstborn children in Egypt who died as a result of GOD hardening Pharaoh's heart after the 9th plague? What about their free will? (These questions aren't directed at you specifically, Ben.)

The fact is that GOD is going to do exactly what He wants to do. It's not our place to accuse Him of wrongdoing.

Paul sums this up perfectly in Romans 9:20-21
But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyburn

Are you a Servant...or a slave?

A slave:

Romans 6:18
And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.

2 Peter 1:1a
Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ,

James 1:1a
James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ,

Revelation 1:1
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants—things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John,

Revelation 7:3
saying, “Do not harm the earth, the sea, or the trees till we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads.”

The words in bold all come from the Greek word doulos, which means "slave." As in a person owned as a possession.

Romans 6:22
But now having been set free from sin, and having become slaves of God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end, everlasting life.

Here is a different variation of the word, douloo, which is a verb meaning "to enslave" or "to cause one to become a slave."

The only reason doulos/douloo is translated as "servant" (or "bondservant" in the NKJV) is to keep from offending English readers. You have to remember that the King James Bible was first published in the midst of the Enlightenment and slavery was becoming a very unpopular concept.

The New Testament continually compares salvation to slavery. The meaning is clear: when you get saved, you become the property of GOD and your will becomes supplanted with His Will. In other words, a slave only exists to carry out the will of his master.

Of course, it is only after we become willing to become enslaved to GOD that He adopts us as His children, with all the rights and privileges that that entails.

So we might approach GOD with the heart of a slave, but we will not remain as slaves.